Op 20-10-16 om 23:57 schreef Matt Roper:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:28:20PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Instead of running the watermark updates from the callbacks run
>> them from a separate hook atomic_evade_watermarks.
> The commit message here is a bit terse. I'd clarify that the
Op 20-10-16 om 20:35 schreef Matt Roper:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:28:20PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Instead of running the watermark updates from the callbacks run
>> them from a separate hook atomic_evade_watermarks.
>>
>> This also gets rid of the global skl_results, which was
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:28:20PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of running the watermark updates from the callbacks run
> them from a separate hook atomic_evade_watermarks.
The commit message here is a bit terse. I'd clarify that the change
we're making is that watermark register
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:28:20PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of running the watermark updates from the callbacks run
> them from a separate hook atomic_evade_watermarks.
>
> This also gets rid of the global skl_results, which was required for
> keeping track of the current atomic
Op 12-10-16 om 19:15 schreef Lyude:
> Accidentally sent original view twice and found one more issue after
> looking at the rest of them, sorry about that!
>
> On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 13:04 -0400, Lyude wrote:
>> Loving this patch so far! Would it be possible to get this split into
>> two separate
Accidentally sent original view twice and found one more issue after
looking at the rest of them, sorry about that!
On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 13:04 -0400, Lyude wrote:
> Loving this patch so far! Would it be possible to get this split into
> two separate patches though? One for removing skl_results
Loving this patch so far! Would it be possible to get this split into
two separate patches though? One for removing skl_results and one for
programming watermarks as a separate step.
On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 15:28 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of running the watermark updates from the
Loving this patch so far! Would it be possible to get this split into
two separate patches though? One for removing skl_results and one for
programming watermarks as a separate step.
On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 15:28 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of running the watermark updates from the
Instead of running the watermark updates from the callbacks run
them from a separate hook atomic_evade_watermarks.
This also gets rid of the global skl_results, which was required for
keeping track of the current atomic commit.
Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst